Burt Gummer
May Have Shorter Meme Posting Times Than U Normies
Staff member
2A Bourbon Hound 2024
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Charter Life Member
Benefactor
Vendor
Supporting Member
Salesman of the Year
Multi-Factor Enabled
Glocks and 1911s
- Thread starter John Travis
- Start date
- Replies 58
- Views 1,350
SergeToll
Well-Known Member
it start at 1906 and after all... 1911 has been adapted
SergeToll
Well-Known Member
I did watch it. And not only this one. I've studied Luger Parabellum for over the year. As a result, made my own video.
I have the utmost respect for John Travis. Not only is he a foremost expert on 1911s, he has loved and cared for many dogs. And, he has invited many folks to his place for a cup of coffee. I think he is a real gentleman.
But. I wish he wouldn't spend any time denigrating Glocks. Or comparing Glocks to 1911s. It is beneath him. Different pistols for different eras. I have both and I will never be without both.
My story goes something like this:
I was raised by an ex farm boy whose only firearm was a Baker Batava Special 12 gauge. Quail, squirrel, rabbit and deer gun. My granddaddy bought 12 gauge shells by the case. He had two other sons.
I loved ALL firearms and bought a H&R Topper .410, with paper route money, at the age of 14. My early adult firearm years were spent buying .22s, cheap ones. No Brownings or Winchesters. A few shotguns. No Browning humpbacks. I wanted a Hi-Power. I wanted Colt 1911s. Colt revolvers. S&W revolvers. Forty years ago I bought my 1st Colt 1911. Hard times and I had to sell it. I'm 77 now. I presently have three 1911s. None of them Colts. Two Springfields and a Tisas.
The knock against 1911s, in my early years was the cost! The knocks against them now are the costs, and the non-ability of the average 1911 shooter to fix them. More cost for a gunsmith. Most parts are NOT drop in! CNC machinery, MIM parts and Turkish 1911s have brought 1911 costs down. More folks can afford them. They can still be finicky! Some gun owners act like Luddites. 1911s are heavy. John Browning did not design the 1911 with a lightweight frame. And he designed it for 7 round magazines. Any mag over 8 rounds looks like an abomination!
Glocks . . . we can all afford them. Parts are cheap. Practically anyone can replace those parts. Every Glock that I've ever shot is more accurate than I'm capable of. How can Glocks not be an innovation? Any 1911 with a plastic frame? Have mostly stamped internal parts? The first Glock held 17 rounds. I prefer the G19. It's much lighter than my 1911s. Changing sights on a Glock is easy-peasy. All Glocks have the same slide cuts. Different height sights for different barrel lengths and calibers.
1911s can be a work of art. I think of Glocks as ugly, but reliable, tools. The 1911 for then and now. The Glock is for now.
But. I wish he wouldn't spend any time denigrating Glocks. Or comparing Glocks to 1911s. It is beneath him. Different pistols for different eras. I have both and I will never be without both.
My story goes something like this:
I was raised by an ex farm boy whose only firearm was a Baker Batava Special 12 gauge. Quail, squirrel, rabbit and deer gun. My granddaddy bought 12 gauge shells by the case. He had two other sons.
I loved ALL firearms and bought a H&R Topper .410, with paper route money, at the age of 14. My early adult firearm years were spent buying .22s, cheap ones. No Brownings or Winchesters. A few shotguns. No Browning humpbacks. I wanted a Hi-Power. I wanted Colt 1911s. Colt revolvers. S&W revolvers. Forty years ago I bought my 1st Colt 1911. Hard times and I had to sell it. I'm 77 now. I presently have three 1911s. None of them Colts. Two Springfields and a Tisas.
The knock against 1911s, in my early years was the cost! The knocks against them now are the costs, and the non-ability of the average 1911 shooter to fix them. More cost for a gunsmith. Most parts are NOT drop in! CNC machinery, MIM parts and Turkish 1911s have brought 1911 costs down. More folks can afford them. They can still be finicky! Some gun owners act like Luddites. 1911s are heavy. John Browning did not design the 1911 with a lightweight frame. And he designed it for 7 round magazines. Any mag over 8 rounds looks like an abomination!
Glocks . . . we can all afford them. Parts are cheap. Practically anyone can replace those parts. Every Glock that I've ever shot is more accurate than I'm capable of. How can Glocks not be an innovation? Any 1911 with a plastic frame? Have mostly stamped internal parts? The first Glock held 17 rounds. I prefer the G19. It's much lighter than my 1911s. Changing sights on a Glock is easy-peasy. All Glocks have the same slide cuts. Different height sights for different barrel lengths and calibers.
1911s can be a work of art. I think of Glocks as ugly, but reliable, tools. The 1911 for then and now. The Glock is for now.
OP
Other than jokingly...when have I done that?
My stance on Glocks has always been that they're good solid pistols, and they fill a role. My reasons for not owning one are largely personal, and thus have no place in a technical discussion.
Much the same way that I prefer Smith & Wesson's revolvers over Colt's. Personal preferences.
I've often pointed out that there are more similarities than differences between the two, and that if more people understood that, these silly arguments would stop.
My issues are with the rabid fans who claim absolute superiority...not with the pistol itself.
Last edited:
This statement could not be farther from the truth.
Last edited:
Not a claim reality. Last Glock a bought a G19 Gen 5 MOS took it out of the box and after 5,000+ rounds no issues. No “the extractor profile isn’t right, or “you have the wrong recoil spring weight” or “it’s the magazine” it just WORKS. I had 1911’s for a long time and I have never had one that didn’t need “something “ after 2,000 rounds.
mellocollins
Well-Known Member
I don’t exactly know how to express what I feel. I have had many run-ins with glock fanboys that were associates or friends over the years. Most think the glock is the best with very little experience with anything else.
Glock triggers suck compared to a decent 1911. I don’t know how many times I have heard, “you don’t want an external safety, you could forget it and die”. Etc….
Better triggers make shooting accurately easier. With a minimum of training the safety becomes part of your manual of arms. Sweeping it off as you draw.
I see the glock as the four door honda civic automatic. Great on gas, easy to park for anyone, turn the key and go.
The 1911 is a manual, v8, sports car like a mustang or camaro. Sucks on gas and takes a little experience to drive well but, sure is a lot more fun to drive.
Glock triggers suck compared to a decent 1911. I don’t know how many times I have heard, “you don’t want an external safety, you could forget it and die”. Etc….
Better triggers make shooting accurately easier. With a minimum of training the safety becomes part of your manual of arms. Sweeping it off as you draw.
I see the glock as the four door honda civic automatic. Great on gas, easy to park for anyone, turn the key and go.
The 1911 is a manual, v8, sports car like a mustang or camaro. Sucks on gas and takes a little experience to drive well but, sure is a lot more fun to drive.
OP
How do you figure?
They're both locked breech, short recoil operated with the same tilting barrel locking system. The heart of the system.
They both use a sliding breechblock that dismounts from the front of the frame.
They're both fed from detachable box magazines located in the grip.
They both function on the controlled feed principle, with claw extractors in the right side of the slide and fixed ejectors located in the left side of the frames.
Thus, the statement: "They operate in exactly the same way" is completely accurate.
Last edited:
OP
Sorry you've had such bad luck. That hasn't been my experience.
Of course, when you've got a couple dozen different entities...using various outsourced vendors for small parts and magazines...marketing the pistols with most of them seeming to make up the specs as they go, you can expect problems. Hard to control quality on a finished product with 20 different hands in it that aren't under the same roof. Rather like herding cats.
The problem isn't with the design. It's with the modern execution of the design. So many people have been trying for so long to prove that they're smarter than John Browning, they really believe they have.
Last edited:
One is hammer fired, the other is striker fired. One has a grip safety as well as a slide safety, the other has a plastic doohickey. One has an internal extractor, the other is external. One trigger is great, the other is dog water. They are not the exact same.
OP
That's just the ignition system. It's like claiming that Ford's 351 is superior to Chevrolet's 350 because the firing order is different or because the distributor is located in the front instead of the back.
Those are accessories that don't have anything to do with the basic operation.
Two methods/mechanisms that perform exactly the same task. On one car, you set the parking brake with a foot pedal. The other with a hand-operated lever in the console. The result is the same.
One car covers the quarter mile two seconds quicker than the other. They both get you from Point A to Point B. They do exactly the same job. Refer to ignition system.
Basic operation is, though. That's all that really counts.
To wit:
Locked breech, short recoil, tilting barrel, sliding front dismount breechblock, detachable box magazine located in grip, etc.
Glocks are... meh. I love the 1911 but also realize that a reliable, duty grade striker-fired 9mil pistol can be had for less than half the price of a similarly built 1911. I like M&Ps, CZs, heck even the gen 2 Springfields don't feel that bad. But for some reason, I have just never been a huge fan of Glocks. The blockiness of the grip is a turn-off and now the market is flooded with many reliable options that do the same thing and look/feel better while doing it.
I have bought a Tisas 1911 and shot the snot out of it. Great starter gun if I get into trying to fit custom parts so I don't cry over ruining a vintage 80s series colt or something. But I do think that the 1911 isn't worth the squeeze for 99% of shooters looking for a tool to carry. Great gun, if you have the trigger time then run it, but modern striker guns and even newer DA/SA guns (Sig P226, Beretta 92, CZ P-07, etc) are just so much easier to train up on and require a LOT less maintenance.
I have bought a Tisas 1911 and shot the snot out of it. Great starter gun if I get into trying to fit custom parts so I don't cry over ruining a vintage 80s series colt or something. But I do think that the 1911 isn't worth the squeeze for 99% of shooters looking for a tool to carry. Great gun, if you have the trigger time then run it, but modern striker guns and even newer DA/SA guns (Sig P226, Beretta 92, CZ P-07, etc) are just so much easier to train up on and require a LOT less maintenance.
I am admitting I have not read every single reply, but as a shooter on the wrong side of 50 years of age - I started with 1911s and revolvers. Still love 1911s , revolvers and other classic designs, but I can appreciate the modern ones as well. Anytime i hear someone say “it just doesn’t fit my hand” , I must admit I think less of you as a shooter. I don’t care what firearm platform it is generally require some minor fit up. If you shoot shotgun most serious trap & skeet shooters have the gun fit to them by shimming the stock. The shooters that don’t get fitted for a gun learn to adjust themselves around the gun
In order for me to hit the mag release on a 1911, I need to have grips with a little cutout and/ or a larger release button - do you hear me complain ? Nope. Most guns require some level of customization- modern striker fired polymer pistols are no different. Most have different backstraps or grip frames to make adjustments as needed.
This is my opinion and is not directed at anyone specific
In order for me to hit the mag release on a 1911, I need to have grips with a little cutout and/ or a larger release button - do you hear me complain ? Nope. Most guns require some level of customization- modern striker fired polymer pistols are no different. Most have different backstraps or grip frames to make adjustments as needed.
This is my opinion and is not directed at anyone specific
Last edited:
OP
You're confusing operation with bells and whistles...but...never mind.
No, I’m not. The 1911 operates by the hammer dropping, it’s not an “option” you add to it.
@John Travis sometimes, no matter matter how precisely you say something, there's that one guy who hears what he wants to hear.
OP
For the sake of your understanding, I'm gonna try one more time.
Operation description: Numbers assume .45 caliber/230 grains/830 fps.
The trigger is pulled and the gun fires.
The bullet moves forward and the slide moves backward, carrying the barrel with it.
At .100 inch of rearward travel, the bullet exits, the slide continues on momentum and the barrel starts to move downward.
At .200 inch, the barrel is completely disengaged from the slide and the slide continues its journey.
At .250 inch of slide travel rearward, the barrel reaches an abutment that stops its rearward movement. The barrel now rests on the frame bed.
The extractor pulls the fired case from the chamber and holds it until the ejector kicks it clear of the port...and the slide continues.
The slide uncovers the magazine, allowing the next round to rise into position to meet the slide when it returns.
The slide reaches its abutment and stops.
The action/recoil spring sends the slide forward, stripping a round from the magazine and pushes it into the chamber.
The slide then contacts the rear of the barrel hood, causing the barrel to move forward and up.
Just as the barrel is completely engaged with the slide vertically, the slide goes to full battery and stops.
The trigger is released, allowing it to reset and the gun is ready to fire again.
Whether the gun is fired by striker or hammer and firing pin is irrelevant. Whether the extractor is internally or externally mounted is irrelevant. Whether the trigger pivots or moves in a straight line is irrelevant.
And, now I've spent enough time explaining this. You'll either get it or you won't.
Cheers
Last edited:
This thread is why I like CFF. I enjoy a polite, educated discussion. Different minds think differently.